Mandelson failed security vetting. Starmer says he didn’t know

Just scanning through the newspapers and there too, there is little support for KS. Even the Guardian and Observer (leftist papers) say he is unpopular and I didn’t read anything positive from either. Likewise the Telegraph, The Independent, DM etc.

Quentin Letts is on TV now saying very few in the House supported KS, which is how I saw things today. He said the atmosphere was icy today. He says it is a low character point to blame everybody else rather than yourself.

Would that be the same Quentin Letts who mocked Andrew Marr after he was disabled by a stroke? - just one of his many repulsive pieces of writing.

Letts is the last person who should be making allegations of low character.

Whichever TV station had Quentin Letts must have been somewhat desperate. I'm sure there are many other people whose opinion would be taken more seriously.

If Quentin Letts is your considered best commentator, there’s something seriously wrong with judgement. He’s a thoroughly nasty piece of work

Quentin Letts is an appalling fellow. I sometimes have a look at the Daily Mail online to get an inkling of what the right wing are up to. Letts is dreadful.

Doesn't that depend on which newspapers are being perused?

I think today will be the day we find out what really happened!

love0c

I think today will be the day we find out what really happened!

No.
We’ll find out what we’re allowed to know and we’ll believe it if it suits our narrative.

love0c

I think today will be the day we find out what really happened!

If you believe that then I’m afraid you are going to be very disappointed.
The answers that the FO want us to believe have already been written.

Mollygo

love0c

I think today will be the day we find out what really happened!

No.
We’ll find out what we’re allowed to know and we’ll believe it if it suits our narrative.

Yes, we will find out today if the Foreign Office did tell the PM that Mandelson had failed the vetting process or not. It’s been extensively discussed on the thread already, and is the critical issue.

love0c

I think today will be the day we find out what really happened!

We'll be lucky!
Every person, every office is working for themselves.
All self-serving.

I don’t think *Olly Robbins will lie MartavTaurus, are you saying that you believe he will?

I am disappointed and cross that despite all the shenanigans of elections it appears our elected representatives are just faces and it’s the civil servants who are running the country…

To me Starmer is a liar. I will believe Olly today. It is televised so we will hear what he has to say. I hope this will be the day we see the back of Starmer. If we do not have hope, then what do we have?

What really happened was that Keir Starmer made an absolutely disastrous choice of candidate for Ambassador despite general disdain for Mandelson and ignoring serious advice from senior party members and staff before his appointment, and it blew up in his face and will continue to do so as long as he remains PM.
Looking at the massed ranks of Labour behind him in the Chamber, mostly unknown and very angry, perhaps they may free themselves of this perfidious man, leaving space for better candidates for high office to appear.
If nothing else came out yesterday it is clear Starmer is not in control, either of civil servants or of his own party.

love0c

To me Starmer is a liar. I will believe Olly today. It is televised so we will hear what he has to say. I hope this will be the day we see the back of Starmer. If we do not have hope, then what do we have?

Wow! I hope I never have to face you on a jury, if you make up your mind before you even hear the evidence.

We shall start to find out in a few minutes time.

This in The Times.

The Times has been told that Robbins will use an appearance before the foreign affairs select committee on Tuesday to reveal that he did not see the formal recommendation by UK Security Vetting (UKSV), the body that vets public appointments, stating that Mandelson should not be given clearance.

He was given a verbal briefing by the Foreign Office’s security team and told that UKSV considered Mandelson’s case to be “borderline”, although if the decision was UKSV’s, it was likely to oppose giving him clearance. Robbins assessed the “outstanding risks” and concluded that they could be mitigated.

Robbins is expected to highlight the “prevailing atmosphere” at the time of the appointment, including the fact that Starmer chose to press ahead with announcing Mandelson as ambassador to the United States before security vetting had been conducted.

If he says that he will come up again chair Emily Thornberry, who said in the HoC yesterday, that Mandelson’s appointment was leaked to the press, probably by Mandelson himself, bouncing the government into making the announcement.

GrannyGravy13

I am disappointed and cross that despite all the shenanigans of elections it appears our elected representatives are just faces and it’s the civil servants who are running the country…

I know it’s not funny, but that’s so what it said in
Yes Prime Minister!

That used to be one of my favourite ever programmes.

I have listened to the opening of OR’s testimony this morning.

My early conclusions are that our PM either didn’t want to know or those around him didn’t want him to know.

Someone wanted Mandelson to have the Ambassador job, regardless…

Listening to Robbins it sounds as though when Mandelson was found to be borderline on the vetting process the foreign office decided they could manage the problem. It had nothing to do with Epstein.
Having decided that the PM would just have been told Mandelson had the green light.

Yes, to me it seems to vindicate Starmer and confirm that he knew nothing about the problems with the vetting.

Thats just what the original news report said as quoted in the O/P.

Then right wing press, politicians, and posters decided delightedly to jump on the bandwagon. Resign they demanded, in the face of local elections.

Before all aspects had been thoroughly investigated.

twaddle

love0c

To me Starmer is a liar. I will believe Olly today. It is televised so we will hear what he has to say. I hope this will be the day we see the back of Starmer. If we do not have hope, then what do we have?

Wow! I hope I never have to face you on a jury, if you make up your mind before you even hear the evidence.

Exactly what I was going to say. Deciding which witness to believe before they are even in the dock is hardly a neutral view. Talk about judge, jury and executioner!

I'm watching it now, and there is a lot of 'I can't say'ing going on. I appreciate that this must be a difficult interview, but the tone is peculiar. Olly Robbins is almost jovial, as are the people sitting behind him, and keeps saying that he wasn't privy to various conversations, so can't answer questions. This is exactly Starmer's defence, so it's odd that it is Robbins' too - does anyone in power have an overview of what's going on?

Emily Thornberry is very incisive - I'm not usually a fan of hers, but she's absolutely on the ball with this.

What's hilarious is the CIA/Trump will have known all about Mandy so could have played him like a cheap violin and certainly won't have shared anything you couldn't have read in the papers.